Edici6n dc Andres Ciudad Ruiz. Mario Humbcrto Ruz Sosa y M.

" Joscfa Iglcsias POJ1(;C dc Lcn

ANTROPOLOGIA DE LA ETERNIDAD:
LA MUERTE EN LA CUL TURA MAYA
SOCIEDAD ESPANOLA OE ESTUOIOS MAYAS. CENTRO OE ESTUDIOS MAYAS
@

I '

.

.
't.
w" . I ..

!t
t,
.. . " .


'0
.'
"\ I, . ) ,.
. '. l' -----
. .
. ' :JI.J "I .,., . "

... ;\\ .. "'- '

It
_.'t ...,I :""
;,/1"
" - . . , '


"j' .
,
I""" f ;-
' -..I;.., " . 1 .,
..
" ! .. ,-.. ...
.. &-'-

f /', " J ,f I.
' . - ... J . p '
r
'-". . . .
16
VICTIMS OF HUMAN SACRIFICE IN MULTIPLE TOMBS OF
THE ANCIENT MAYA: A CRITICAL REVIEW
Estella WEISS-KRElCI
Universily of Vienna and University of Oporto
Within the last decades of Mesoamerican mortuary research, it has become
increasingly apparent that archaeological deposits with remains of more than one
individual constitute complex entities. Aseries of processes have been held res-
ponsible for the formation of multiple burials such as collective secondary fu-
neral rites, ongoing tomb use, human sacrifice, and skeletal curation and reuse of
bones (e.g. Chase and Chase 1996; Healy er al. 1998; McAnany 1998: 133-135;
Middleton er al. 1998; Welsh 1988: 167-169). Yet, no common methodology
exists to distinguish one process from the other. This problem is especially emi-
nent in the Maya area, with regard to the presence of sacrificial victims. In his
analysis of 1170 Lowland Maya burials, Welsh (1988: 167) identified 131 burials
as sacrificial constituting 11 % of the analyzed burial population. Of those, 60
were multiple direct and indirect burials (with and without protective structures).
For each burial We1sh simply inferred sacrifice because the remains from more
than one person had been found in the grave. The burials consisted of either ar-
ticulated complete bodies or a combination of articulated complete skeletons su-
rrounded by disarticu1ated bones. Welsh (1988: 168-169) interpreted the former
as sacrifice of orphans and offspring to accompany dead parents and the latter as
sacrifice of slaves at death of their masters. Both interpretations were based on
accounts of human sacrifice from the 16th century (Tozzer 1941: 117, note 535,
129: note 604).
Apart from inductive inference from a historie source, Welsh like Tozzer
(1957: 129-130) and Schele (1984) before hirn, also used iconographic evidence
to back up the existence of human sacrifice in classic Maya funerary ritual. De-
capitation and disemboweling scenes on funerary ceramies, stelae, altars and
355
356
ESTELLA WEISS-KREJCI
murals seemed to complement some of the Iimbless, headless, and allegedly
chopped up bodies that were found in individual as weil as multiple burial con-
texts '.
In the last decade Welsh's conclusions considering disarticulated remains in
multiple contexts have been successfully challenged (McAnany 1995: 62; McA-
nany et al. 1999: 132). Disarticulated remains are now seen as the product of a
wide variety of behaviors such as bodyprocessing, storage, exhumation and co-
lIective reburial, caching of tomb contents, looting and desecration, ritual use of
human bones, disturbance of bones, sequential interments in collective crypts and
caves, as weil as rites of tomb reentry (Becker 1986: 46-47,1992; Chase 1994;
Chase and Chase 1996; Fitzsinamons 1998; Gillespie 2001: 89-90; Healy cl al.
1998; Houston etal. 1998: 19; Krejci 1998; McAnany 1995: 62, 1998; McAnany
et al. 1999; Weiss-Krejci 2001: 778-779).
A different attitude persists regarding multiple burial deposits in tombs and
crypts where no evidence for reentry exists and corpses are more or less comple-
te. Although there is usually no evidence for unnatural death, some bodies are still
regarded as sacrificial victims (Harrison 1999: 59; Martin and Grube 2000: 33;
Schele and Mathews 1998: 109). The assumption rests on indirect evidence such
as age profile, gender and lack of associated objects. Though these pattems re-
semble those of tombs with evidence for reentry, the simultaneous disposal is at-
tributed to a different funerary tradition and human sacrifice.
In this artic1e I will argue that most of these alleged sacrificial victims in mul-
tiple burials crypts and tombs with no evidence for reentry are probably not
primary burials, but people that have most likely died at different times and
only were buried simultaneously. In order to develop the argument, in the first
part of this article, I will review the evidence for human sacrifice in multiple bu-
rial deposits and show how the current views came into being. In the second part
I will discuss the issue of secondary buria!. Though I do not rule out the pos-
sibility that ritual sacrificial victims were buried in multiple tombs, I will argue
that most of the multiple tombs, that are currently known as sacrificial, hold
members of kinship based corporate groups.
1 I consider the use of death related iconography from ceramies or monuments 10 explain the state of
bones in terms of human sacrifice as ralher problematic. Images of the death of Christi an martyrs in Eu-
ropean churches (decapitation. shooting wilh arrows eie.) Of depictions of scenes of killing and decapitation
from the Old Testament for example could never explain the stale of the bodies faund in the church
tombs. Even if olle could prove that persons have actually been decapitated or gutted, the analogy would
still not work, since decapitation was used in executions and on the battle field and extraction of viscera and
tlle heart was part of mortuary treatment.
vrCfrMS OF HUMAN SACRIFICE IN MULTIPLE TOMBS OF THE ANCIENT ... 357
SEQUENTlAL VERSUS SIMULTANEOUS DISPOSAL
Maya Highlands
Although human sacrifice is thought of as a common mesoamerican cultural
practice (Kirchoff 1943), archaeologists were late in considering it a Classic
Maya trait. Apart from isolated speculations as to the sacrificial status of indi vi-
dual s at Uaxactun and San Jose (Ricketson and Ricketson 1937: 56; Thompson
1939: 210) large-scale evidence onJ y emerged during archaeological invesliga-
tions in the Guatemalan high lands. In the 1930s and 1940s archaeologists en-
countered several tombs with multiple intennents at the siles of Tzicuay, Guay-
tan/San Agustin Acasaguastlan, Kaminaljuyu, Nebaj and Zaculeu (Fig .1 ). Hence,
the evidence from these si tes was ambiguous and interpreted in !Wo ways. Some
burials were interpreted as the intenment of one principal the adult
accompanied by sacrificial victims, i.e. children and women, others were
seen as the result of reuse of tombs.
Kaminaljuyu
The first victims of human sacrifice were discovered at Kaminaljuyu in
Tombs III, IV, V, and VI of Mound A and Tombs I, II (Fig. 2), IV, and V of
Mound B'. Altogether there were 29 indi vi duals in the eight tombs, of which 19
were more or less complete (Table I). The complete bodies represented 9 adults
and 10 subadults (five less than 15 years old, see Table 1). Eight adults were iden-
tifi ed as male (one per tomb), one of the subadults was identified as a female. The
remaining 10 less complete individuals (5 adults and 5 subadults less than 15 years
old) consisted of postcranial scraps of bones (I individual in Tomb B-IV), 5 skuHs
(Tornbs A-III, A-V, and B-IV; one carved, one painted red), and skull fragments
and teeth (4 individuals in Tombs A-V and B-V) (Kidder er al. 1946: 89-90).
Kidder er al. assigned the adult mal es the status of tomb principals, whereas
they came to the conclusion that:
all skeletons not centrally located were those of viClims slaughtered to serve
the tamb's owner in the hereafter. Father Roman y Zamora records that such 53-
crifices were made during the sixteenth century in Alta Verapaz. And at the Espe-
ranza mounds the facts that the persons in question were aU children Of adolescents,
that some of them were apparently female, and that they possessed few or no
adornments lend color to the supposition that they were slaves or concubines
(Kidder el a/. 1946: 89-90).
1 I have omitted Kaminaljuyu Tombs B-X, B-lD, and Mound E-In, Tomb 1 from the presenl discussion
since they have beeil heavil y dislurbed. For the same reason I have also omitted Nebaj Tomb B-IIl. Tikal
Buria1200 and Piedras Negras Burial 10.
358

o 2Ilbn lOOIm


ESTELLA WEISS- KREJCI
.DzibiJcbaltun
Chiehen Itza

Mayapan
NORTHERN LOWLANDS
Calakmul

Uaxactuo .
Holmul -San lose
CAR/BBEAN
SEA
Chiapa Corzo
Toruna

Tikal -Barton
4=
SUTHERN LOWLANDS -Caledonia
.Seibal
Altac de Sacrificios
NORTHERN HIGHLANDS
Nebaj

Zaculeu
eTzicuay
Los MangaMies
Guaytan.

Kaminaljuyu
SOUTHERN HIGHLANDS
Btlberta


Caracol
Copan
Chalchuapa
Fig. 1.- Map of the Maya area showing sites mentioned in the text.
VICTIMS OF HUMAN SACRIFICE IN MULTIPLE TOMBS OF THE ANCrENT ...
359
o
..
o
Fig. 2.- Kaminaljuyu, Mound B, Tomb Il (Kidder er al. 1946: figure 32).
360 ESTELLA WEISS-KREJCI
Adult skulis or whatever remained of them were eonsidered as trophy heads,
but the skulls of subadults, wh ich were too young to be from enemy warriors
(Kidder el al. 1946: 59) were also eonsidered to be saerifieia! vietims. However,
eranial and posteranial remains oftwo adults and one ehild ofTomb B-IV on the
other hand were evaluated as reburied, sinee Tomb B-IV had cut and disturbed the
earlier Tomb B-III.
Kidder Cl al. (1946: 89-90) supported their argument for human saerifiee by
using the hi storie aeeount of Roman y Zamora published in 1575, whieh had been
translated by Thompson (1939: 283-284). It deseribes how after the death of a
chief, male and fe male slaves were killed and buried with their master. Sinee Ro-
man y Zamora was never in the New World he had obviously eopied the story
from Las Casas' then unpubli shed Apologetica Historia Sumaria (Las Casas
1967). This aeeount was 10 beeome a centra! element in the diseussion of Maya
human saerifiee from thereon (Ruz 1973: 208-209; Shook and Kidder 1952:
122; Smith and Kidder 1951: 28; Welsh 1988: 169).
Whereas evidenee for sirnultaneous disposa! of the dead and rapid tomb filling
existed for some of the multiple tombs, two additional tombs (Tornbs A-I and A-
II) were clearly reused (Kidder el al. 1946: 48-53). The 3 main bodies (2 adults in
Tomb A-I and I adult female in Tomb A-II) had been buried in an extended su-
pine position and seemed undi sturbed. The bodies that were not eentrally loeated
(7 in Tomb land 3 in Tomb II) and had been interred at some earlier point in
time, laeked bones or skull s. They belonged to 4 adults and 6 subadults. The evi-
denee for reuse and burial over a longer time period eaus<,;d problems in inter-
pretation. Sinee the tomb prineipals in both tombs had been buried last, Kidder el
01. argued that the ehildren in both tombs mi ght have been killed to aeeompany
adults that had been buried previously:
In the case of A-ll the latest occupant, an adult (and it should be reealled that
this was perhaps a woman), was certainl y not accorded a victim, for the two chil -
dren, whose more or less disturbed skeletons lay to one side, had obviously been
buried long enough befare Lhe adult to pemlit the accumulation over and around
them of a layer of earth and rotted material. We believe on the evidence of a bone
and a tooth of a second adult, that there had been a prior intennent in A-II and that
the children were immolated for hi s benefit (Kidder el al. 1946: 90).
Between 1947 and 1948 two exeeptionaliy rieh Late Preclassie ehambers
were diseovered in Mound E-Ill. The tombs consisted of aseries of benehes that
stepped in and down ward on all four sides to reetangular buria! ehambers, whieh
had been covered by erossbeams. In Tomb II (Fig. 3), 2 ehildren and I adult had
been buried in the lower main ehamber with rich fumishings. More ceramic
offerings and a young adult had been deposited on the upper benehes above the
roof. The whole spaee was filled with earth and eovered by a floor. Shook and
VICTIMS OF HUMAN SACRIFICE IN MULTIPLE TOMBS OF THE ANCIENT . . . 361
o
o
I
I I
J J
I J I
I J I
I J I
I J J
I I I
I : I
I I I
I J I
I I I
J I I
I I I
I L ___ __ _____________ _ --f--....:-.....L.-'-""-6...L.----"' ..... -1 I
I, J
I 1 " ( r
r I
L ______ _______ _ ___ _ _ ___ + _ ________ _ .; _______ J
Fig. 3.- Kaminaljuyu, Mound E-IfI-3, Tomb II (Shook and Kidder 1952: gure 15).
Kidder (1952: 64) considered all but the main adult in Tomb II as sacrificial
victims and the deposition of corpses, roofing and filling as one simultaneous
event. Nevertheless, the drawing (Fig. 3) shows that the 10mb probably had
stood open for a while. The bones of the child in the northwestem part of the
ehamber were found disartieulated and the artieulaled arm of the adult buried
above the roof on Ihe third beneh had fallen down into a bowl on the seeond
beneh.
Zaculeu
In a large 10mb below Strueture I-D al least 7 individuals were found, some
entirely disintegrated (Woodbury and Trik 1953). Of the 2 bodies in the center, at
362 ESTELLA WEISS-KREJCI
least was an adult. The other tomb oeeupants eonsisted of I infant (Iess than
one-year-old), 3 ehildren and I young adult (probably female). Some indivi -
duals were grouped at the wall , 2 ehildren had been placed by the ehamber en-
trance (Trik 1953: 83-84). Sinee the simultaneous natural dealh of all seven in
time for the elaborate funeral rites seems im probable human saerifiee was
strongl y suggested (Trile 1953: 80).
Henee it was obvious that the tomb had been open for a whi le. Three separa-
te mud layers had washed over the stairway, and eaeh had been eovered with a
eoat of red paint. Most of the ceramies in the tomb dated to the Earl y CIassie (At-
zan Phase), but one Late CIassic Polychrome Vase had been put with one of the
children at the entrance. The physical anthropologists (Stewart 1953: 301) did not
find any evidence for violent death. However, Aubrey Trik suggested that the
mud layer was deposited in one rainy season and that a slightly later date should
be given to the Atzan Phase, perhaps about 700 A.D. (Trik 1953: 24).
Of the other 107 burial deposits at Zaculeu, 42 were multiple and contained
remains between 2 and 14 indi viduals each. Trik (1953: 78-81) interpreted some
as reused (e.g. Graves 1- 14, 11- I, 13-22), others as possibly sacrificial such as the
double burial of an old adult male and a young female (Grave 37-3). The bodiless
skulls in Graves 1-14, 1-2 and 13-5 in hi s opinion may have been reburi als from
other graves rat her than sacrificed victims.
Nebaj
Between 1946 and 1949 A. Ledyard Smith encountered six multiple tombs
(the tomb in Mound l and Tombs I, H, Ha, IV, VIII in Mound 2) at Nebaj,
which dated from the Early CIassic, Late CIassie and Postclassie periods (Smith
and Kidder 1951). The tombs, whi ch held between 2 and 12 bodies each, contai-
ned 2 infants, 20 ehildren, l adoIescent female and 15 adults (Table I). Like at
Kami naljuyu the pattern of more lavishly dressed adults in the center of the
tombs, the differences in burial position and the presenee of isolated skulls were
seen as signs for sacrifiee (Smith 195 1: 2).
Evidence at Nebaj existed of tombs having been kept open for subsequent
burials (Smith 1951: 28) and Kidder's ceramic analysis showed that the tomb in
Mound I and Tomb I in Mound 2 contained Early and Late Classic ceramies. But
he concluded:
Thus is would appear that all our Early C1assic tombs must date from the lat-
ter days of that period. It is not improbable, indeed, that they were contemporane-
ous with the beginning of the Peten Late C1assic and that Nebaj , and the western
Guatemala highlands in general, lagged somewhat behind in cerami c develop-
men! (Kidder 1951: 77).
VICfIMS OF HUMAN SACRl FiCE IN MULTIPLE TOMBS OF THE ANCIENT . . . 363
TABLE 1
Age distribution in multipl e tombs of the Maya
Sile and Tomb Locatioll Period
9
Age
5/4 /519 >19
To/al Rejerell ce
Caledonia
Tomb, Suucrure A-l Earl y Classic. laIe Classic 0 I 0 8 9+ Healy Cl al. 1998
Caracol
Lower Tomb. Structure A 34 laIe Classic 0 0 0 4 4+ Chase and Chase 19%
Tomb in Structure A 38 - " - 0 0 0 J 3
..
Guaytan
Tomb 0, Mound 24 laIe Classic 0 0 0 11 11 Smith and Kidder 1943
Tomb m. Mound 24 LaIe Classic, Early Postcl assic 0 0 0 37 37 "
Kaminaljuyu
Tomb n. Mound E-IO-3 Laie PrecJassic 0 2 0 2 4 Shook and Kidder 1952
Tomb I, Mound A Earl y 0 2 2 5 9 Kidder ef al. 1946
Tomb n, Mound A - 0 I I 2 4 "
Tomb 111, Mound A " - 0 3 0 I 4 " -
Tomb IV, Mound A
..
-
0 0 2 I 3
..
-
Tomb V, Mound A
..
0 1 0 J 4 "
Tomb VI, Mound A
..
0 0 1 1 2
"
-
Tomb I. Mound B
..
0 3 0 1 4
..
-
Tomb 11, Mound B " 0 1 2 1 4
..
-
Tomb IV, Mound B
..
0 I 0 5 6
..
Tomb V, Mound B " 0 I 0 I 2 -
..
Lubaantun
Tomb, Structure 146 LaIe Classic 0 0 0 18 18 Hammond er al. 1975
Nebaj
Tomb 1, Mound I Earl y laIe C1assic 2 5 I 4 12 Smith and Kidder 1951
Tomb I, Mound 2 - 0 7 0 J 10 -
..
Tomb H. Mound 2 Early 0 I 0 I 2
..
Tomb HA. Mound 2 - 0 J 0 I 4 "
Tomb IV, Mound 2 Laie Classic 0 3 0 4 7 -
..
Tomb vrn, Mound Early Postelassie 0 1 0 2 3 "
Palenque
Tomb 1lI. Temple XVUI-A laie Classic 0 0 0 2 2 Ruz 1962
Piedras Negras
Burial 5. Acropol is laIe Classic 0 2 0 1 J Coe 1959
Buria1 13, Strncture 0 - 13 -
..
0 2 0 1 J+ Houslon el al. 1998
Tikal
Buriall66. North Acropolis laie Preclassic 0 0 0 2 2 Coe 1990
Burial 167. Nort h Acropolis -
..
- 1 0 0 2 3 - " -
Burial 10, Nonh Acropolis Early 0 7 2 I 10 "
Burial 48, Nonh Acropolis
0 0 2 I 3 -
"
Burial l60, Structure 7F 30
..
0 0 2 I J Coe 1965
Tzicuay
Tomb in Mound 7 Early and LaIe Classic. 0 I 0 10 11 Smith 1955
Early Postclassic
Zaculeu
Tomb in Structure 1 Earl y Classic. LaIe Classic 1 3 0 J 7 Woodbury ,!:,dTrikl95J
Grave 5, Structure 13 laie Classic 1 0 0 I 2 -
Grave 2, Slructure 1 Postclassic I 0 0 2 J+
..
-
Grave 14, StrnClure I Earl y Postclassic 0 0 0 10 10+
..
-
Grave I, Strucrure 11 Early and Postclassic 0 1 0 12 13+ "
-
Grave 22, Structure 13 0 2 0 3 4
..
-
Grave 3, Strucrnre 37 Late Postclassic 0 0 0 2 2
..
-
364 ESTELLA WEISS-KREJCI
Tzicuay and Guaylall
At other sites tomb reuse had emerged as the obvious cause for joint existen-
ce of ceramies from different time periods, the presence of several bodies and the
signs of disturbance. At Tzicuay in the department of EI Quiche, the remains of
10 adults and I child were found in a tomb under Structure 7. Ceramies indieated
sporadie tomb reuse from the Early Classie through the Postclassie period (Smith
1955: 34). Late C1assie Tombs II and III of Mound 24 at Guaytan in the Motagua
Valley held II and 37 adults. The differing degrees of disturbance of skeletons
pointed to repeated tomb reentry and sequential deposition of eorpses (Espinoza
1952: 34-36; Harnmond el al. 1975: 68; Smith and Kidder 1943: 123-129).
At the beginning of the 1950s, Shook and Kidder (1952: 122) reeonsidered the
evidenee for human saerifiee in the Maya Highlands. They earne to the eonclusion
that the tombs at Nebaj and Zaculeu were also reused and not sacrificial, a view
later also favored by Hammond et al. (1975: 67). Hence by the beginning of the
fifries only one highland site (Kaminaljuyu) was considered to hold large tombs
with sacrificial vietims. Sacrifice was not supported by any evidence of violent
death but merely inferred by historie analogy and the lack of indication for tomb
reuse. The Lowland Maya at that time were still seen as a people that did not
supply the dead with servitors, nor use tombs often more than onee (Shook
and Kidder 1952: 122) J. But this view was about to change.
Maya Lowlands
Palenque and Piedras Negras
In 1952 Alberto Ruz diseovered a tomb under the Temple of Inseriptions. The
ehamber with the sarcophagus. which held the skeleton of a person known as Ja-
naab' Pakal! (Martin and Grube 2000: 162), had been sealed with a triangular
stone dOOf. Part of the outside of thi s door forrned the northern end of a small box
with the remains of 6 young people (Fig. 4). The box measured 1.3 by I meter. Its
eastern and southern ends were eonfined by the tunnel wall and its west side by a
36-eentimeter-high wal l. The archeologists and the Palenque village doetor iden-
J Shook and Kidder do not menlion two multiple Early Classic tombs thai had bcen discovered nt Ua-
xaclUn in Strucrure B-VUT and B-XI (Smith 1950: 10 1-1 02) . These tombs held onl y wornen and children
and were unusual for Uaxactun in several respecis. Apart from being multiple. a rare feature aI Uaxaclun,
lhe siructures in whieh lhey were found 1md been construclcd 10 serve as mausoleums (Smilh 1950: 51 -52).
Smith did not discuss why these burials were multiple and their existence was conspicuously glossed over
in early discussions of multiple Maya burials. By that time multiple buriaIs were also known from other
Lowland siles, e.g. HolmuI , where severaI bodies had been buried in the rooms of Building B, Group 11
(Merwi n and Yaillant 1932).
VICTIMS OF HUMAN SACRIFICE IN MULTIPLE TOMBS OF THE ANCIENT ... 365
Fig. 4.- Palenque. Temple of Inscripti ons, burial eist (Ruz 1955: figure 4).
tified some of the burials as primary, wi th at least 4 bodies articulated although
slightly disturbed. One body eloser to the bottom of the box was badly disinte-
grated and disarticulated and the sixth body was incomplete (Ruz 1955: 84-86) .
Ruz interpreted all bodies as victims sacrificed to accompany (he corpse in the
main chamber (Ruz 1955: 102), but admitted that it must have been difficult to fit
that many people into such a small box:
Pr 10 reducido dei espaci o, los cuerpos deben haber sido arnontonados en a]
sepultura con dificultad, 10 que explicarfa la posici6n forzada de algunos miembros
y el desorden en que yacfan los huesos (Ruz 1955: 86).
366 ESTELLA WEISS-KREJCI
Indeed, six bodies in the flesh could not have been simultaneously buried in a
space less than half a cubic meter. The bodies must have entered the box in either
a defleshed state or had been put in one by one over a longer time period.
The evidence that emerged in 1956 from Temple XVIII-A further supported
the evidence for human sacrifice as part of ancient Maya funeraI. Inside Tomb Irr
the disarticulated remains of a young adult woman were found at the wall whereas
a young adult male lay undisturbed in the center. Outside the tomb entrance
were the badly destroyed bones of 4 individuals (at least 2 adults and I infant)
(Ruz 1962: 64-75,1973: 209).
Burial 5 in the Acropolis of Piedras Negras was also interpreted as possibly
sacrificial. It held the badly destroyed remains of I male adult and 2 children.
All three skeletons had associated objects, although the bulk of material was
with the adult. Coe suggested that one of the children's heads was put on the
pelvis ofthe adult, although the child's skulI consisted ofteeth only. The bo-
nes held traces of red pigment, which Coe interpreted as a sign far child sa-
crifice though he admitted that sacrifice was none too secure (Coe 1959:
124-125,131).
Tikal
At the end of the 1950s and beginning 1960s five sacrificial tombs were
found at Tikal. Except for Early Classic Burial 160 all tombs (Late Preclassic Bu-
rials 166 and 167 and Early Classic Burials IO and 48) were discovered in the
North Acropolis. Burial 166 contained 2 femal e skeletons. Skeleton A had been
buried in an extended supine position, Skeleton B 's parts were distributed at the
south part of the burial chamber, the cranium was broken and slumped in the
middle of three stacked vessels. Since the skeleton was complete Coe assumed
that the woman was probably mutilated, perhaps even cannibalized (Coe 1990:
240-241) although no cutmarks could be found. Nevertheless there existed evi-
dence that the chamber was reopened:
This circumstance indicates a possibility, however unlikely, that the chamber
though built as indicated, in fact lay originally empty, then was opened, entered th-
rough its N side, stocked, and finaJly closed by reused masonry installed from out-
side (Coe 1990: 238).
Burial 167 held 1 primary extended adult male and the remains of 1 woman
and I infant who had been buried into two ceramic containers. Some of the wo-
man's bones had been snapped in two to fit into the bowl. Haviland did not in-
terpret the evidence as one for exhumation of the corpses and tripIe simultaneous
reburial but simultaneous burial as a sign for simultaneous death:
VICJ1MS OF HUMAN SACRlFICE IN MULTIPLE TOMBS OF THE ANClENT ... 367
One mighl hazard the guess that upon the man's death, his wife and child
were killed for intennent with rum, although there are alternatives to this. One is
that a concubine and a child were kil1ed, removing future competitors to the official
herr; another is that a favorite female retainer and her child were sacrificed to attend
her lord's need after death. All three interpretations irnply a subordinate position of
the woman to the man (Haviland 1997: 9).
In Buria! 10 (Fig. 5) an adult male (probably the ruler Yax Nun Ayiin I, for-
merly known as Curl Nase) had been laid out centrally in the chamber and was
,
, ,
,
,
,
,
,
,
1
,
,
I
o
I
N
;
;
Fig. 5.- Tikal, North Acropolis, BuriallO (Coe 1990: figure l60).
368 ESTELLA WEISS-KREJCI
accompanied by the remains of 8 subadults. A tenth complete body, a child
around seven years old and the youngest of all, had been entered last, and was
found in higher ftll stratum (Fig. 5, Skeleton J). Nothing in the record of Burial 10
hin ted at grave reentry or successive opening. Nevertheless, the skeletons of the
subadults in the tomb chamber were smashed by the collapsed roof; osteological
evidence did not suggest unnatural death and some ceramies in the tomb were also
incomplete (Coe 1990: 480-486; Culbert 1993: fig. 2Od).
In Burial48 the incomplete remains of I male adult (possibly Siyaj Chan K' a-
wiil l!, formerly known as Stormy Sky) were accompani ed by 2 subadults. Evi-
dence for reentry existed:
Both absence of lilhic layers in the fill and presence of the peculiarly situated
capstones are bound to remai n imrinsicaJly bothersome. Such points admittedly
could be used to buttress a case for the original intennent 's profound disturbance,
but only if thefe were dire need to invoke reentry in the first pi ace (Coe 1990:
123).
The decided horrifying aspect (Coe 1965: 29) of Burial 160 in wh ich 2 ado-
lescents were buried with I adult is equaUy questionable. Sacrifi ce was suggested
by the sprawled position of the bones and eccentric flints, which had been scat-
tered about the bodies. The image of these tools as part of sacriftcial rites was per-
petuated by a scene on Tikal Altar 5, whi ch shows a skull and long bones su-
rrounded by two figures holding a knife and an eccentric flint. Nevertheless, the
recent decipherment of Altar 5 suggests a different scenario. It shows Jasaw
Chan K' awiil I (Ruler A) of Tikal and a lord from Maasal conducting an exhu-
mation ritual of a high ranking lady, possibly Ruler A's wife (Mart in and Grube
2000: 46).
Lubaanl"n, Caracol and Caledonia
As in the Highlands, in the Maya Lowlands human sacrifice was only one ex-
planation for the presence of multipl e individuals. Evidence for reuse of tombs in
the Lowlands emerged in the 1970s and 1980s. A Late Classic tomb at Lubaantun
discovered in 1970 held at least 18 young and middle-aged adults. Hammond el
al. (1975) concluded that the bodies were entered one by one over a time period
of approximately a century. A multiple tomb at Caledonia, Belize with bodies of
at least 8 adult indi vi dual s of both sexes and I chiId also bore signs of reuse (He-
aly el al. 1998). At Caracol, where multiple-individual interments make up a
large portion of the burial sam pIe (Chase and Chase 1996: Table 10.1), several
tombs showed ancient enmes to place bodies (Chase and Chase 1987, 1996). The
lower tomb at Structure A 34 contained a minimum of 4 adults (2 males, I fe-
VICTIMS OF HUMAN SACRIFICE IN MULTIPLE TOMBS OF THE ANCIENT ... 369
male) who probably were buried over the course of one hundred years. Another
tomb in Structure A 38, which displayed signs of reentry despite the absence of a
fonnal entryway, held 3 adult individuals (2 males, I female) (Chase and Chase
1996: 66-71).
PROCESSES OF MULTIPLE BURIAL FORMATION
By the beginning of the 1990s three kinds of multiple burial deposits had been
di stingui shed. With evidence for ongoing reuse of aburi al facility and successive
deposition, bodies were not considered as sacrificial victims but sequentially de-
ceased people (e.g. Hammond et al. 1975: 67; Shook and Kidder 1952: 122;
Welsh 1988: 35). Among those we fmd Tombs A-I and A-II at Kaminaljuyu, the
tomb in Mound 7 at Tzicuay, Tombs II and m in Mound 24 at Guaytan, Mound 1
Tomb I and Mound 2 Tombs I, II, Ha, IV and VIII at Nebaj, the tomb in Structu-
re I at Zaculeu, the tomb in Structure 146 at Lubaantun, several tombs at Caracol
(e.g. lower tomb in Structure A 34 and tomb in Structure A 38), the tomb in
Structure A 1 at Caledonia (all di scussed above), and burials at Mayapan (e.g. Bu-
rial 17, Smith 1962: 237, 252-253), Tonina (Burials III-I, IV-3, IV-6 and IV-9,
Becquelin and Baudez 1979: 134-151), Chiapa de Corzo (Tomb 2, Mason 1960:
21) and Los Mangales (Buri al 5, Sharer and Sedat 1987: 139).
With evidence for one time interment of several , more or less complete bo-
dies, -so called primary burials-, accompanying bodies were considered
sacrificed victims that had been killed in honor of a principal deceased (e.g.
Shook and Kidder 1952: 122; Welsh 1988: 167). Such sacrificial burials derived
from direct and indireet contexts. Among them we find Tombs n in Mound E-III-
3, Tombs A-IV and A-VI and Tombs I, H, IV and V in Mound B at Kaminaljuyu,
Tikal Burials 10 and 48, the eist in front of the chamber at the Templ e of Ins-
criptions and Tomb rn in Temple XVrn-A at Palenque, Piedras Negras Acropo-
li s Burial 5, Burial C-8 at San Jose (Thompson 1939: 210), Burial6 at Los Man-
gales (Sharer and Sedat 1987) and Burial XXXVH-3 at Copan (Fash et al. 1992:
111). For Zaculeu double Burial 3 in Structure 37 (Trik 1953: 80), and Chiapa de
Corzo double Burial178/178a (Agrinier 1975: 34) sacrifice was discussed as only
one possibility. The tripie infant burial at Tonina (Cache IV -I, Becquelin and
Baudez 1979: 173) was categorized as a cache '.
If isolated body parts and fragmentary bones had been simultaneously buried
together (also in direct and indireet contexts) interpretations diverged widely. De-
4 Becker (1992) di scussed the problem of distinguishing bclween aburial deposit wilh human skeletal
remains and a cache deposit with human skeletal remains. In an emphasis of the struclural similarities bel-
ween burials and caches he concluded ir archaeological evidence may not be able 10 detennine the intent.
thell the process may not have been differenliated by those who made the depos it (Hecker 1992: 187).
370 ESTELLA WEISS-KREJCI
pending on the nature of the deposit (the kind of body parts and whether the bu-
rial s contained a primary burial) the disarticulated remains were interpreted as eit-
her mutilated victims (e.g. Welsh 1988: 169) or reburied bones from earlier di s-
turbed burials. Kaminaljuyu tombs A-lII and A-V, Tikal Burials 166 and 167,
Cuello Burials 7/8 and Mass burials I and 2 (Robin 1989; Robin and Hammond
1991), Sei bai Burial4 (Tourtellot 1990: 133), the burial in Structure 216 at San-
ta Rita Corozal (Chase 1991: 92) , and the Colha skull pit (Massey and Steele
1997) were all di scussed in terms of violent death; Chiapa de Corzo Burial 45
(Lowe 1962: 23) and Burials 120, 121 and 122 (Agrinier 1964: 55-61) on the ot-
her hand as burial s with reburied bones. For a number of burials, including Za-
cu leu Burials 14 and 2 in Structure 1 and Burial5 in Structure \3 (Trik 1953: 81),
Burial 4 at Nebaj (Smith and J(jdder 1951: 26) , Burial 41 A at Chiapa de Corzo
(Lowe 1962: 21-22) and Palenque Burials 3,5, and 7 in Group IV (Rands and
Rands 1961: 1Ol) excavators reached no conclusion and offered both explanations
as possibilities.
Secondary Burial Rites: Multi-stage Burial Practices, Ancestor Worship,
Tomb Reentry and Reused Bones
The simultaneous deposition of partial remains of bodies could also imply pro-
cesses other than sacrifice or accidental disturbance of older burials. For Chase
(1994) and Chase and Chase (1996, 1998) the combined existence of multiple-in-
dividual interment in Caracol tombs, removal of tomb conients, caching activities
and the collective deposition of articulated and di sarticulated bodies suggested the
existence of a belief system in which death is not seen as instantaneous. It inlplies
that the ancient Maya like people in many other parts of the world performed two-
stage burials.
McAnany ( 1995, 1998) proposed that ancestor linked protracted treatment of
skeletal remains was responsible for the formation of secondary multiple bu-
rials. At the si te of K'axob 15 direct burial contexts contained more than one in-
dividual ranging from two to nine per context. The combination of primary and
secondary burials and age patterns in multiple contexts indicate that these were
members of families, some of which had been curated in order to be interred to-
gether with other family members at some later time (McAnany et al.1999: 135).
Like Chase and Chase (1996: 77), McAnany et al. (1999: 131) regarded this be-
havior as embedded in an ideology in which the passage of a person from life to
death is only a gradual one.
The view that the ancient Maya performed ceremonies of comrnemoration,
which included tomb reentry and ritual buming, is the combined insight from de-
cipherment of inscriptions and archaeological work. At Piedras Negras tripi e
Burial 13, discovered in 1997, showed that the bones were smoked after the
YICTIMS OF HUMAN SACRIFICE IN MULTIPLE TOMBS OF THE ANCIENT . .. 371
flesh had decayed. Houston el al. (1998: 19) concluded that Burial 13 might be
the grave of Ruler 4, reentered and rituaJly bumed by Ruler 7, 24 years after in-
terment. Burial 10 had also been anciently burned and inscriptions indicate that
Ruler 4 obviously was not the only one to be commemorated in such way (Fitz-
simmons 1998).
Inscriptions from Tonina and Ceibal indicate similar practices of veneration of
the dead (Fitzsimmons 1998; Stuart 1998: 396-399). Ancient reentries, not just to
place bodies but to remove bones and artifacts -and in some instance burning-
have been archaeologically recorded from Kaminaljuyu, Chiapa de Corzo, Tilcal,
Altun Ha and Copan (Krejci 1998: 217-218). While Coe (1990: 867-872) and
Pendergast (1979: 183-184, 1982: 139) originally regarded these behaviors as acts
of desecration and looting, the hieroglyphic evidence now suggests that at least
some of these reentries result from ancient rituals.
The Many Meanings of Secondary Burial
Given the complexity of rites of reburial and tomb reentry, the discussion of
these phenomena in terms of secondary burial seems rather problematic.
Among Mayanists various definitions exist. Tiesler (1999: 106) defines a se-
condary burial as one in which bones are disarticulated. McAnany et al. (1999:
131) see it as either a primary burial that was exhumed and then reinterred or
defleshed skeletal elements that were selectively retained above ground -
usually in a shrine or bundle- to be interred at a later date. For Welsh (\ 988:
35) secondary burial is one in which the skeleton has been intentionally di-
sarticulated and been moved or manipulated after death, but before burial,
whereas a primary burial is as a deposit in which skeletal remains of one or
more individuals are more or less complete and articulated. Despite this defi -
nition Welsh includes interments of whole bodies in ums or between bowls in
the category of secondary burial, whereas he considers headless bodies and tho-
se, whose facial bones have been removed as primary. The disarticulated bones
in tombs that were successively used are also primary because though the
bundles were found disarticulated, they were not originally intended to be so
(Welsh 1988: 35>. As recently discussed by Sievert (2001) disarticulated re-
mains in Maya contexts are arnbiguous and secondary burial comprises a va-
riety of unrelated phenomena. Middleton et al. (1998) pointed out the problems
that arise for the application of terms like primary burial (a skeleton is re-
covered in its original burial context) and secondary buriah (the skeleton is
not in its original burial context) in tombs, where the same burial space has
been used repeatedly.
372 ESTELLA WEISS-KREJCI
Wha! is a Secondary Burial?
It was Robel1 Hertz (1907), who first di scussed that deposition of the corpse,
may not be the endpoint in the funeral but can form a stage in a mortuary program
that includes exhumation. Using the example of extended buria1 ritual s in Indo-
nesia and Melanesia, Hertz drew attention to parallel processes of decay, mouming
and the changing state of the soul. The body of the deceased while awaiting a se-
cond burial is temporarily deposited in a place distinct from the final one. Ouring
thi s time rhe soul of the deceased is be1ieved to sray elose to the body. Once the
corpse has decomposed and bones are dry a final rite is held. The soul can enter
the land of the dead and the mourning is over. The intermediary period between
dearh and final deposition lasts at least as long as the processes of putrefaction and
can vary between a few months and several years. Hertz saw the rotting and
dissolution of the soft tissue as a key element of the ritual.
Although Hertz primarily focused on the process of putrefaction and the re-
burial of bones, multi -stage burials do not always fit thi s narrow definition. Pu-
trefaction can be avoided and depending on the method and the number of treat-
ments the corpse can end up in a variety of states. Stripping the f1esh and
desiccating the body accelerates or bypasses the process of putrefaction and can
give a reburied body a primary appearance (Ouday 1997: 119; Feest 1997: 424;
Hutchinson and Arag6n 2002: 37). Cremation rituals can also mark the end of a
multi -stage funeral cyc1e (Hutchinson and Arag6n 2002: 30-31; Huntington and
Metcalf 1991: 101 , 137). What ends the liminal phase is not so much the presen-
ce of bones, but the absence of putrid matter.
Temporary storage, exhumation and final deposition can take place for a va-
riety of other reasons that do not necessarily carry connotations of prolonged
dying, a necessity for completion of putrefaction or a journey of the soul. The
long time period that usually elapses between first disposal and the final funeral
may allow the survivors to reorganize their social relations and the timing of se-
cond funerals can be strongly caused by economic considerations (Hutchinson and
Arag6n 2002: 30). Among the Merina of Madagascar secondary treatment of the
dead is a widespread custom. Afamadihana is freguently held to return corpses to
the ancestral collective tombs that have been stored elsewhere. Ouring the cere-
mony other bones are also exhumed from the tomb into which the corpse will be
buried. Hence, in contrast to Hertz's view of secondary funeral thefamadihana
does not liberale the soul of the dead nor is the rituallinked with the end of the
mouming. But like secondary burial in Indonesia it serves as act of separation and
increases the distance between the Iiving and the dead (Bloch 1971: 138-171).
In Europe both bones and corpses in the f1esh were freguently reburi ed. When
noble people died in distant areas and had to be transported back home, their corp-
ses were reduced to bones through either temporary storage (passive excamation)
or boiling and defleshing (acti ve excamation) (Weiss-Krejci 2001, in press). The
VICfIMS OF HUMAN SACRIFICE IN MULTIPLE TOMBS OF THE ANCIENT ... 373
bones of the eommoners also went through processes of exhumation and reburial.
Henee the reburial of their bones from erowded European eemeteries into ehamel
houses followed purely praetical reasons. Whereas in all these European examples
the reduction to bones marked the point of reburial, other reasons eaused reburial
of eorpses in varying degrees of deeomposition. When buildings, erypts or tombs
were not yet ready to house the mOllal remains eorpses were often stored and la-
ter reburied, similar to processes proposed by MeAnany (1998: 276) for the an-
eient Maya. Reburial of body parts or bones happened after enemies had looted
tombs.
When fanlies eonstrueted new tombs, older predeeeased fami ly members
were often exhumed from their originalloeations and reburied into the new faei-
lities (Weiss-Krejei 2oo!: 776, in press). These relocations into newly eonstrueted
tombs happened frequently among upri sing medieval houses (Weiss-Krejei in
press), but were also eommon in post-medieval times among eompeting houses of
lower rank, often in munieipal or royal service (Harding 2002: 153). Whether bo-
nes or aIlieulated eorpses were transported merel y depended on the time elapsed
sinee death. Sinee this postfuneral reloeation took plaee after the funeral it is not
paIl of two-stage burial praetiees. It eonforms to the gathering together of an-
eestral remains as deseribed for K'axob (McAnany and Lopez 1999: 162; MeA-
nany et al. 1999). At this Belizean site seeondary multiple interment within a sin-
gle faeility is a hall mark of the Terminal Formative and was probably used by
inereasingly powerful families in negotiating asoeietal shift from the less een-
tralized power strueture of Formative viUages to an increasingly eentralized po-
litieal environment (MeAnany el al. 1999: 144).
DISCUSSION
Maya burial analysis has been eharaeterized by an individual-oriented pers-
peetive, wh ich --despite physieal evidenee for violent dealh- has resulted in the
interpretation of several eolleetive tombs as saerifieial. As Brown (1995: 4-5) ar-
gued, the advantages of individualized mortuary analysis make us forget that
eolleetive burials onee were more common than they are today. Ethnographie stu-
dies from different paIlS of the world (Ueko 1969) reveal that eolleetive burial
into tombs is a hallmark of multigenerational, kinship-based eorporale groups. For
the aneient Maya these social units have reeently been identified as houses ' (Gi-
lIespie 2000, 200 I: 94; Joyee and Gillespie 2000). Gillespie (200!: 100) diseus-
3 The concep! of house was introduced by Levi -Strauss and defined as {<a corpomte body holding an es-
tate made up of ooth material und immaterial weallh. whieh perpetuates itself Ihrough the transmission of
its name, ils goods, and its litles down areal Of imaginary line, considered legitimate as long as this con-
linuilY can express il self in the language of kinship or of affinily and, most oflen, of b o l h ~ > (Uvi-Slrauss
1982; 174).
374 ESTELLA WEISS-KREJCI
sing the Temple ofInscriptions, argues thatJanaab' Paka!'s tomb may not reflect
individual status and aspirations, but was the works of his house, whose
members invested much of their own identity and prestige in hi s person and me-
morialization after hi s death. Following this argument I would like to propose
that the Temple of Inscripti ons did not only serve as resting place for the king, but
also other members of hi s house.
The emphasis on the individual, the difficulties of recognizing tomb reentry
and our current conception of secondary burial as deposition of bones have pro-
moted the identification of sacrificial victinlS in multiple tombs. Given the simi-
larities between sequential and simultaneous tombs with regard to age and artifact
distribution, we may consider most collective Maya tombs as burial places for
members of ancient houses.
Simultaneous Deposition
Since secondary interments can contain complete portions of the skeleton
(McAnany el al. 1999: 131) and a wrapped and preserved corpse can be tempo-
rarily stored (McAnany 1998: 276) simultaneous deposition of articulated corpses
may be non-sacrificial. The more or less complete skeletons in Kaminaljuyu
Tombs A-I and A-VI and B-I, B-II, and B-IV were probably deposited si multa-
neously (Fig. 2). The bodies had been wrapped and placed in wooden containers.
The way in which the bones had spread and settled in the tomb indicates that all
occupants, both principals and inferior received the same treatment (Kidder el
al. 1946: 89). This offers the possibility hat the bodies were temporarily stored
and that not death but only burial was si multaneous.
In Tikal Burial 167 storage is also suggested. The child in the bowl was com-
plete though slightly di sarticulated, and could have been easily moved around in the
plate. The woman, however, with too large a body to be stored in such a small con-
tainer, was incomplete, di sarti culated and a11 her long bones had been snapped in
two (Coe 1990: 232). Burial 10 (Fig. 5) was very damaged due to total roof co-
11apse. With most bones out of position and badly preserved an evaluation is diffi-
cui!. Since there was no evidence for successive opening, Coe claims that the
tombs had not been reentered. Hence he does not consider the possibility that it
could have just stood open for a while (Coe 1990: 480). On the other hand, what
could point to simultaneous reburi al are the incomplete ceramics (Coe 1990: 484).
Sequential Deposition
Considering the widespread custom of tomb reuse in Mesoamerica (Cabrero
and LOpez 1998: 338; Middleton er al. 1999; Perlstein and Calme 1999: 267) ar-
VlcrlMS OF HUMAN SACRIFICE IN MULTIPLE TOMBS OF THE ANCIENT ... 375
chaeological evidence (Coe 1990: 123, 240-241) strongly suggests that Tikal
Burials 48 and 166 were reentered. Reuse of aburial facility may also fonn an al-
ternative explanation to sacrifice in the Temple 01' Inscriptions. The box was too
sm all to simultaneously receive six bodies in the flesh. Only four out of six ske-
letons were complete, and even those were 1101 entirely articulated (Ruz 1955: 84-
86). Since body articu1ation and completeness decreases from the top to the bot-
tom of the box it is Iike1y that the bodies were entered over an extended period of
time. The flesh of earlier burials would have partially decayed allowing space for
additional corpses. The existence of stairs leading down to the tomb makes such
process even more probable.
As discussed for Preciassic Tomb II in Mound E-III-3 at Kaminaljuyu distur-
bance has occurred not only after but also before the tomb was filled. One child' s
bones were di sarticu1ated and the ann of the adult on the bench had fallen down.
What cou1d bolster the idea of sacrifice in this tomb is the extended prone position
in which two of the corpses were buried. This position was interpreted as evidence
for sacrifice for 27 individuals at Chalchuapa 6 (Fowler 1984) and individuals at
Los Mangales (Sharer and Sedat 1987: 137). Nevertheless, one should keep in
mind that the extended prone position is fairly common in the Maya area and
known from many non-sacrificial contexts. Of 117 individuals at Barton Ramie
77 were buried in an extended prone position. Some of those had their legs cros-
sed (BR 1-22, BR 123-19, BR 151-2) resembling a tied body (Willey el al.
1965). Since it is un1ikely that all these people were sacrificed (that would be 65
percent ofthe burial population ofBarton Ramie alone) we may assume that the-
re exist alternative non-sacrificial scenarios. The extended prone position was not
only a hallmark of the Be1ize River Valley (16 of 27 individuals at Baking Pot),
but also occurs at A1tun Ha (69 individuals), Balberta (7 individuals, Arroyo
1990), Ujuxte (7 individuals, Arredondo 1999), Uaxactun (4 individuals) and at
several other sites in lower quantities (see Welsh 1988: 35-51).
The most recent example that has been used to back up the presence of human
sacrificial victims in multiple contexts comes from Temple XIII-sub in Palenque
(Tiesler er al. 2002). In contrast to all other examples so far discussed (with ex-
ception of Skeleton 2 in Burial 6 at Los Mangales, see Note 6), the two bodies bu-
ried at the sides of the Red Queen (one extended supine child, the other an ex-
tended prone young female) show evidence of mutilation. AJthough the cut marks
on the chi1d's neck and the woman's vertebrae cou1d indicate non-ritual killing or
postmortem body processing (Curet and Oliver 1998: 223; Tozzer /941: 130-131)
for this Late Classic tomb sacrifice is a possibi1ity.
6 They aB were found in the LaIe Preclassic Structure E7-) which contained 33 bodies, all adults and
almost all male. Same of the extended prone burials looked as if (hey had been bound al the wriSl'i and an-
kles. Whereas few grave goods wcre presenl 24 bodies had been elaborately wrappcd in bark cloth (Fow-
ler 1984). Skeleton 2 in Burial 6 al Los Mangales showed evidence of a depressed fracture on the right pa-
rietal bone near the sagittal suture (Sharer and Sedat 1987: 137).
376 ESTELLA WEISS-KREJCI
Mortality
In several instances direct double burials do suggest simultaneous death.
Contrary to Welsh I do not think that the frequent combination of adult females
and foetuses or very young infanls indicales that the child was sacrificed and the
mother had died while giving birth (Welsh 1988: 168), but that both had died du-
ring pregnancy or delivery. High infant mortality rates are known from several si-
tes with large burial sampies (Storey 1992), but subadults also often died after in-
fancy (Andrews and Andrews J 980: 320; Jacobi 2000: 90; Saul and SauJ J 99 J:
136; Tiesler 1999: 140). Few infanls have been included in multiple tombs, bul
this may be a matter of preservation or indicate that this age group was accorded
a different burial treatment and buried elsewhere.
To explain combinations of adults and adolescents in double burial s, one
should not role out the possibility that people do die together during accidents or
epidemics and therefore are buried together. A defrnitely non-sacrificial direct
double burial has been encountered at the colonial site of Tipu where two females
were buried together holding hands (Jacobi 2000: 168).
CONCLUSIONS
Aseries of reasons cast doubt on the assumption that the inclusion of sacrifi -
cial victinlS in tombs fonned a frequent behavior among the ancient Maya. Since
completeness and body articulation is a result of treatment, climate, number of re-
burials and time since death a secondary burial could be an articulate body or a
bone. With the exception of the persons buried with the Red Queen of Palenque
and one skeleton at Los Mangales, sacrificial victims usually lack evidence that
indicates violent death. Additionally mortality rates from different sites show
that subadult mortality beyond infancy is not unnatura!. Both sequential and si-
multaneous tombs hold considerable amounts of subadults. The clustering of su-
badults and young adult in tombs could indicate that their status within the group
was probably too low to give them their own tomb or even funera!. Such cluste-
ring of subadults and adult females in multiple contexts is not only documented
from house tombs in Europe (Weiss-Krejci 200 I), but also a process observed for
direct multiple intennents at the site of K' axob (McAnany et al. 1999: 134-135).
Maya collective tombs could indicate biological and affrnal relations. But
only the application of a variety of examination techniques (Whiltington and
Reed 1997) can contribute to solve the question of sacrificia1 victims in multiple
tombs and enlighten our understanding of ancient Maya society.
Acknowledgements: This research was funded by the Austrian Science Foun-
dation (FWF-Project HJ40-SPR). I would like to thank Susan GilJespie, Nonnan
VICTIMS OF HUMAN SACRIFICE IN MUL nPLE TOMBS OF THE ANCIENT . .. 377
Hammond. Rosemary Joyce. and Vera Tiesler Blos for contributing literature and
ideas. and Steven Weiss for editorial suggestions.
REFERENCES
AGRINIER, Pierre. 1964. The Archaeological Burials GI Chiapo de Corzo ond fheir Furnilure.
Papers of the NWAF 16. Pub. 12. Bri gham Young Universit y. Provo.
- 1975. Mound IA, Chiapa de Corzo, Chiapas, Mexico. A Late Preclassic Architectural
Camp/ex. Papers of the NWAF 37. Brigharn Young University. Provo.
ANDREWS, E. Wyllys, IV and E. WyUys ANDREWS V. 1980. Excavations or DzibilchaltlUz,
Yucaton , Mexico. MARl , Pub. 48. Tulane Universi ty. New Orleans.
ARREDONDO LEfVA, Emesto. 1999. Patron funerario en el sitio arqueol6gico Ujuxte, Retalhu-
leu: Temporadas 1995-1997, resultados preliminares, inX/I Simposio de l nvestigaciones
Arqlleo/6gicas en Guatema/a, 1998, Eds. J. P. Laporte. H. Escobedo and A.C. Monz6n, pp.
633-638. Ministerio de Cultura y Deportes-IDAEH-Asociaci6n Tikal. Guatemala.
ARROYO, Barbara. 1990. Enterramiellfos de Balberta lm si/ia eil la Costa Stlr de Guatemala.
BAR International Series 559. Oxford.
BECKER, MarshalL J. 1986. An Ethnographie and Archaeological Survey of Unusual Mortuary
Procedures as aRefleetion of Cultural Diversity. La Parola deI Passara 226; 31-56.
- 1992. Burials as Caches, Caches as BUrlals: A New Interpretation cf the Meaning cf Ri tual
Deposils among the Classic Period Lowland Maya, in New Theories on (he Ancient
Maya, Eds. E.C. Danien and R.J. Sharer, pp. 185- 196. University Museum Monograph 77.
University of Pennsylvania. Philadelphia.
BECQUELJN, Pi erre and Claude F. Baudez. 1979. ToninG, une eite maya du Chiapas (Mexique) .
Etudes Mesoamericaines Volume 6, Torne 1. Mission Archeologique el Etlrnologique
Franaise au Mexique. Mexico.
BLOCH, Maurice. 197 1. Placing fhe Dead: Tombs, AnceSfral Villages, and Killship Organiza-
lioll in Madagascar. Seminar Press. London.
BROWN James A. 1995. On Mortuary Analysis -with special Reference 10 the SaxeBinford
Research PrograJl1 , in Regional Approaches 10 Morruary Analysis, Ed. L. A. Beck, pp. 3-
26. Plenum Press. New York.
CABRERO, M.a Teresa and Carlos L6PFZ CRUZ. 1998. Las tumbas de liro de EI Pili6n, en el Ca-
n6n de Bolanos, Jalisco, Mexico. La/in Americall Antiqlliry 9 (4): 328-341.
CHASE, Diane Z. 1991. Lifeline 1O the Gods: Ri tual Bl oodleHing at Santa Rita Corozai, in
Sixth Pa/ellque Roulld Tab/e, 1986, Eds. M.G. Robertson and V.M. Fields, pp. 89-96.
University of OkJahoma Press. Nonnan.
- 1994. Human Osteology, Pathology, and Demography as Represented in the Burials of Ca-
racol, Behze, in SIlldies in [he Archaeology 0/ Caracol, Be/ize, Eds. D.Z. e hase and
A. F. Chase, pp. 123-138. Monograph 7. Precolumbi an Art Research Insti tute. San Fran-
cisco.
O-IASE, Arien F. and Diane Z. CHASE. 1987. l nvestigatio!l5 al fhe Classic Maya City ofCaracol,
Belize: 1985-1987. Monograph 3. Precolumbian Art Research Institute. San Francisco.
CHASE, Diane Z. and Arien F. CHASE. 1996. Maya Multiples: lndividual s, Entries, and Tombs
in Structure A34 of Caracol, Belize. Latill American Antiquity 7 ( I): 61-79.
378 ESTELLA WEISS- KREJCI
- 1998. The Architectural Context of Caches, Burials, and Other Ritual Activities for the
Classic Period Maya (as Reflected at Caracol)>>, in Function and Meaning in Classic
Maya Architecture, Ed. S.D. Hauston, pp. 299-332. Dumbarton Oaks. Washington D.C.
COE, William R. 1959. Piedras Negras Archaeology. Artifacts, Caches, and Burfa/s. University
Museum Monograph 4. University of Pennsylvania. Philadelphia.
- 1965. Tikal. Ten Years of Study of a Maya Ruin in the Lowlands of Guatemala. Expedi-
[ion 8 (I): 5-56.
- 1990. ExcQmtions in fhe Great Flaza, North Terrace and North Acropolis afTikal. Tika! Report
14. University Museum Monograph 61 Vols. I-VI. University ofPennsylvania. Philadelphia.
CULBERT, T. Patrick. 1993. The Ceramics ofTikal: Vesselsfrom the Burials, Caches and Pro-
blematical Deposits. Tikaf Report 25, Part A. University Museum Monograph 81. Uni-
versity of Peoosylvania. Philadelphia.
CURET, L. Antonio and Jose R. OLIVER. 1998. (Mortuary Practices, Social Development, and
Ideology in Precolumbian Puerto Rico. Latin American Antiquity 9 (3): 217-239.
EsPINOZA, Gustavo. 1952. Investigaciones Arqueol6gicas en San Agustin Acasaguastlan. An-
tropoiagfa e Historia de Guatemala 4: 19-46.
DUDAY, Henry. 1997. Antropologfa biol6gica de campo, tafonomfa y arqueologia de la muer-
te), in EI cuerpo humano y su tratamiento mortuorio, Eds. E. Malvido, G. Pereira and V.
Tiesler, pp. 91-126. Colecci6n Cientffica 344, Serie Antropologfa Social. INAH-CEMCA
Mexico D.F.
FASH, William L., Richard V. Wn..LIAMSON, Rudy LARIOS and Joel PALKA. 1992. (Tbe Hie-
roglyphic Stairway and its Ancestors: Investigation of Copan Structure lOL-26. Aneient
Mesoamerica 3 (I): 105-115.
FEEST, Christian F. 1997. Zwischen den Welten - zwischen den Disziplinen. Archologische
und historisch-ethnographische Perspektiven zu Bestattungsfonnen im Kstenland von
Virginia und North Carolina. Ethnographisch-Archologische Zeitschrift 38: 4J 9-432.
FrrzsrMMoNs, James L. 1998. Classic Maya Mortuary AIll1iversaries at Piedras Negras, Gua-
temala. Ancient Mesoamerica 9 (2): 271-278.
FOWLER, William R. Jr. 1984. Late Preclassic Mortuary Patterns and Evidence for Human Sa-
crifice at Chalchuapa, EI Salvadon>. American Antiquity 49 (4): 603-618.
GfLLESPIE, Susan D. 2000. Rethinking Ancient Maya Social Organization: Replacing 'Linea-
ge' with 'Hause'". American An[hropologis[ 102 (3): 467-484.
- 2001. Personhood, Agency, and Mortuary Ritual: A Case Study from the Ancient Maya.
Journal 01 An[hropological Archaeology 20: 73-112.
HAMMOND, Nonnan, Kate PRErry and Frank. P. SAUL. 1975. A Classic Maya Family Tomb.
World Archaeology 7: 57-78.
HARDING, Vanessa. 2002. The Dead and [he Living in Paris and London, 1500-1670. Cam-
bridge University Press. Cambridge.
HARRISON, Peter D. 1999. The Lords 01 Tikal: Rulers 01 an Ancienr Maya City. Thames and
Hudson. London.
HAVILAND, William A. 1997. The Rise and Fall of Sexual Inequality. Death and Gender at Ti -
kal, Guatemala. Ancient Mesoamerica 8 (1): 1- 12.
HEALY, Paul F., Jaime J. AWE and Hennann HELMlJfH. 1998. An Ancient Maya Multiple Bu-
rial at Caledonia, Cayo Distriet, Belize. Journal of Field Archaeolagy 25: 261 274.
HERTZ, Robert. 1907. Contribution a une etude sur la represemation collective de la mort. An-
nee Sociologique 10: 48-137.
VICfIMS OF HUMAN SACRlF1CE IN MULTIPLE TOMBS OF THE ANCIENT ... 379
HOUSTON, Stephen, Hecter E,SCOBEDO, Donald FORSYTH, Perry HARDIN, David WEB STER and
Lori WRIGHT. 1998. On the River of Ruins: Explorations at Piedras Negras, Guatemala,
1997. Mexicon XX (I): 16-22.
HUTCHINSON, Dale L. and Lorraine V. ARAGN. 2002. CoUective Burials and Community Me-
mries: Interpreting the Placement of the Dead in the Southeastem and Mid-Atlantic Uni-
ted Stales with Reference 10 Ethnographie Cases from Indonesia, in The Space and Place
ofDeath, Eds. H. Silvennan and D.B. SmalI. pp. 27-54. Archaeological Papers 11. Ame-
rican Anthropological Association. Arlington.
JACOBI, Keith P. 2000. Last Rites for the Tipu Maya. Genetie Structuring in a Co/anial Ceme-
tef). The University of Alabama Press. Tuscaloosa.
JOYCE, Rosemary A. and Susan D. GILLESPIE (Editors). 2000. Beyond Kinship: Social and Ma-
terial Reproduction in House Societies. University of Pennsylvania Press. Philadelphia.
KlDDER, Alfred V. 1951. Discussion, in Excavations at Nebaj, Guatemala. CIW, Pub. 594,
pp. 77-84. Washington D.C.
KmDER, Alfred V., Jesse D. JENNINGS and Edwin M. SHOOK. 1946. Excavations at Kaminalju-
yu, Guatemala. CIW, Pub. 561. Washington D.C.
KIRCHOFF, Pau}. 1943. Mesoamerica: sus Hmites geograficos, composici6n etnica y caracteres
culturales. Acta Americana 1: 92-107.
KREJCl, EsteJla. 1998. Antiguos disturbios y saqueos de entierros en la zona maya, in XI Sim-
posio de Investigaciones Arqueol6gicas en Guatemala, 1997, Eds. J.P. Laporte and H. Es-
cobedo, pp. 215-227. Ministerio de Cultura y Deportes-IDAEH-Asociaci6n TikaL Guatemala.
LAS CASAS, Fray Bartolome deo 1967. Apologetica HislOria Sumaria. 2 vols. UNAM. Mexico
D.F.
LEVJ-STRAUSS, Claude. 1982. The Way ofthe Masks. University ofWashington Press. Seattle.
LoWE, Gareth W. 1962. Mound 5 and Minor Excavations, Chiapa J..e Corzo, Chiapas, Mexico.
Papers of the NW AF 12. Brigham Young University. Provo.
MARTIN, Simon and Nikolai GRUBE. 2000. Chronicle o/the Maya Kings and Queens. Thames
and Hudson. London.
MASON, J. Aiden. 1960. Mound 12, Chiapa de Corzo, Chiapas, Mexico. Papers ofthe NWAF 9.
Brigham Young University. Provo.
MASSEY, Virginia K. and D. Gentry STEELE. 1997. A Maya Skull Pit from the Tenninal
Classic Period, Colha, Belize, in Banes 0/ the Maya: Studies 0/ Ancient Skeletons, Eds.
S.L. Whittington and D.M. Reed, pp. 62-77. Smithsonian Institution Press. Washington
D.C.
McANANY, Patricia. 1995. Living with the Ancestors: Kinship and Kingship in Ancient Maya
Society. University of Texas Press. Austin.
- 1998. Ancestors and the Classic Maya Built Environment}>, in Function and Meaning in
Classic Maya Architecture, Ed. S.o. Houston, pp. 271-298. Dumbarton Oaks. Washington
D.C.
McANANY, Patrieia and Sandra L. L6PEZ V ARELA. 1999. Re-ereating the Fonnative Maya Vi -
Hage ofK'axob. Ancient Mesoamerica 10 (I): 147-168.
McANANY. Patricia, Rebeeea STOREY and Angela K. LocKARD. 1999. Mortuary Ritual and Fa-
mily Politics at Fonnative and Early Classic K'axob, Belize. Ancient Mesoamerica 10 (1):
129-146.
MERWIN, Raymond E. and George C. VAIllANT. 1932. The Ruins of Holmul, Guatemala. Me-
moirs of the Peabody Museum 3, n.
Q
2. Harvard University. Cambridge.
380 ESTELLA WEISS-KREJCI
H UNTlNGTON, Richard and Peter METCALF. 1991. Celebrotions 0/ Death: The Anthropology 0/
Mortuary Rillla/. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge.
MIDDLETON, William D. , Gary M. FErNMANN and Guillenno MOLINA VILLEGAS. 1998. Tomb
Use and Reuse in Oaxaca, Mexico. Anciel1l Mesoamerica 9 (2): 297-307.
PENDERGAST. David M. 1979. Excavations al AllUfl Ha , Be/ize, /964-1970. Val. 1. Royal On-
tario Museum. Toronto.
- 1982. Excavations at Altun Ha, Beltze, 1964-/970. Val. 2. Royal Ontario Museum. To-
ronto.
PERLSTEIN POLLARD, Helen and Laura CAHUE. 1999. Mortuary Patterns ofRegional Elites in
thc Lake Patzcuaro Basin of Western Mexico. Lafifl American Antiquity 10 (3): 259-290.
RANDs, Barbara C. and Robert L. RANDS. 1961. Excavations in a Cemetery at Palenque. Es-
tudios de Culrum Maya 1: 87-106.
RICKETSON, Oliver G. Jr. and Edith B. RICKETSON. 1937. Uaxac/un, Guatemala, Grollp E
1926-1931. C!W, Pub. 477. Washington D.C.
ROBIN, Cynthia. 1989. Preclassic Maya Burials at Cuello, Belize. BAR International Series 480.
Oxford.
ROBIN, Cynthia and Nom1an HAMMOND. 1991. Burial Practices, in Cuello. An Early Maya
Community in Belize, Ed. N. Hammond, pp. 204-225. Cambridge University Press. Cam-
bridge.
Ruz LHUlLLLER, Alberto. 1955. Exploraciones en Palellque: 1952. Anales dellnstitufo Na-
dona! de Antropologfa e Historia 6 (34): 79-112.
- 1962. Exploraciones arqueol6gicas en Palenque: 1957. Anales delillstituto Naciollal de
Alltropologia e Historia 14 (43): 35-90.
- 1973. EI Templo de las Inscripciones Palenque. Colecci6n Cientffica 7. [NAH. Mexico D.F.
SAUL, Frank P. and Julie M. SAUL. 1991. The Preclassic Populati.on at Cuello, in Cuello. An
Early Maya Commllniry in Be/ize, Ed. N. Hammond. pp. 134-158. Cambridge University
Press. Cambridge.
SCHElE, Linda. 1984. Human Sacrifice among the Classic Maya, in Ritual Human Sacrifice
in Mesoamerica, Ed. E.H. Soone, pp. 7-48. Dumbarton Oaks. Washingion D.C.
SCHELE, Linda and Peter MATHEWS. 1998. The Code 0/ Kings: The Language 0/ Se"ell Sacred
Maya Temples and Tombs. Sribner. New York.
SHARER, Roben J. and David W. SEDAT. 1987. Archaeological Invesfigarions ill the Northern
Maya Highlands, Guatemala. University Museum Monograph 59. University of Pennsyl-
vania. Philadelphia.
SHOOK, Edwin M. and Alfred V. KIDDER. 1952. Moulld E-1lI-3, KaminaljllYu, Guatemala.
CIW, Pub. 596. Washington D.C.
SIEVERT, April. 2001. Ancestry, warfare, and divinity in adynamie mortuary program. Un-
published paper presented at the 66th Annual Meeting ofthe Society for American Archa-
eology. New Orleans.
SMITH, A. Ledyard. 1951. Introduction and Field Work, in Excavatiolls at Nebaj, Guatema-
la. C!W, Pub. 594, pp. 1-31. Washington D.C.
-1950. Ua.xacttlll, Guatemala: Excavatiolls 0/1931-1937. C!W, Pub. 588. Washington D.C.
- 1955. Archaeological Recollllaissance in Central Guatemala. CIW, Pub. 608. Washington
D.C.
- 1962. Residential and Associated Structures at Mayapan, in Mayapan, Yltea/an, Mexico.
C1W, Pub. 619, part 3. Washington D.C.
VICTIMS OF HUMAN SACRIFICE IN MULTIPLE TOMBS OF THE ANCIENT ... 381
SMITll, A. Ledyard and Alfred V. KIDDER. 1943. Explorations in the Motagua Valley, Guate
molo. crw, Pub. 546. Washington D.C.
~ 1951. Excavations QI Nebaj, Guatemala. CIW, Pub. 594. Washington D.C.
STEWART, T. Dale. 1953. Skeletal Remains from ZacuJeu, Guatemala, in The Ruins 0/ Za-
cu{eu, Guatemala, pp. 295-31 I. The William Byrd Press. Richmond.
SrOREY, Rebecca. 1992. The Children ofCopao, Ancient Mesoamerica 3 (1): 161-167.
SruART, David. 1998. The Fire Enters His House: Architecture and Ritual in Classic Maya
Texts>}, in FUllction and Meoning in Classic Maya Architeclllre, Ed. S.D. Houston, pp. 373-
425. Dumbarton Oaks. Washington D.C.
T'HONlPSON,1. Eric S. 1939. Excavatiofls al San lose, Brilish Honduras. CIW, Pub. 506. Was-
hington D.C.
TIESLER BLOS, Vera. 1999. Rasgas bioculturales entre los antiguos mayas. Tesis Doctoral.
UNAM. Mexico D.F.
TIESLER BLos, Vera, Andrea CUCINA and Arturo ROMANO PACHECO. 2002. Vida y muerte deI
personaje en el Templo XliI-sub, Palenque: I. Culto funerario y sacrificio humano. Me-
xicon XXIV (4): 75-78.
TOURTELLOT, Gair IIl. 1990. Excavations ar SeibaI, Department 01 Peten, Guatemala. Bu-
rials. A Cultural Analysis. Memoirs ofthe Peabody Museum Vol. 17, n
Q
2. Harvard Uni -
versity. Cambridge.
TOZZER, Alfred M. 1941. Landa's Relacion de las Cosas de Yucatan. Papers of the Peabody
Museum VoL 18. Harvard University. Cambridge.
- 1957. Chiehen Itza and its Cenote 01 Sacrifice. Memoirs of the Peabody Museum Vol. Il.
Harvard University. Cambridge.
TRlK, Aubrey S. 1953. Architecture, Graves, in The Ruins 0/ Zaelileu, Guatemala, pp. 24-
1/1. The William Byrd Press. Richmond.
UCKO, Peter 1. 1969. Ethnography and Archaeological Interpretation ofFunerary Remams.
World Archaeology I: 262-280.
WEISS-KRE1CI, Estella. 200l. Restless Corpses. 'Secondary burial' in the Babenberg and
Habsburg Dynasties. Anriquit)' 75: 769-780.
- In press. Excamation, Evisceration and Exhumation in Medieval and Post-Medieval Eu-
rope), in Interacting wirh fhe Dead: Perspectives on Morluary Archaeology Jor the New
Millennium, Eds. G. Rakita, J. Buikstra, L. Beck and S. Williams.
WELSH, W. Bruce M. 1988. An Analysis o[Classic Low/and Maya Burials. BAR International
Series 409. Oxford.
WHTITlNGTON, Stephen L. and David M. REED (Editors). 1997. Banes o[ the Maya: Studies o[
Ancient Skeletons. Smithsonian Institution Press. Washington D.C.
WILLEY, Gordon R., William R. BULLARD, John B. GLASS and James C. GIFFORD. 1965.
Prehisforie Maya Settlements in the Belize Valley. Papers of the Peabody Museum Vo1. 54.
Harvard University. Cambridge.
WOODBURY, Richard B. and Aubrey S. ThIK. 1953. The Ruins oJZaculeu, Guatemala. The Wi-
lIiam Byrd Press. Richmond.